Demetri Martin is a master of comedic situations. If you’ve never seen

Demetri Martin是喜劇情境的大師。 如果你從未見過

him before, he has a sort of dry brand of observational humor, relying more on anecdotes than full stories, and often uses visuals or music to frame jokes so his audience can understand him in a different way.他以前是一個干humor的觀察性幽默品牌，他更多地依靠軼事而不是完整的故事，并且經常使用視覺或音樂來描述笑話，以便聽眾以不同的方式理解他。

On the surface he sounds like any other comedian, but what I think makes him brilliant is the way he frames his jokes, and the power of context to illustrate our strange societal quirks.

從表面上看，他聽起來像是其他喜劇演員，但我認為讓他出色的是他講笑話的方式，以及用語境的力量來說明我們奇怪的社會怪癖。

“When I cross the street I always look both ways. That’s not crazy.” He says. “But if I look both ways any other time in life, then THAT looks crazy.”

“當我過馬路時，我總是雙向看。 那不瘋狂。” 他說。 “但是，如果我在生活中的任何其他時間都去看這兩種方式，那就太瘋狂了。”

Examples:

例子：

“Getting a slice of pizza” (he looks both ways carefully) “Watch out we got a sneaky pizza eater here”

“拿一塊披薩”(他仔細地看了兩眼)“當心，我們這里有一個偷偷摸摸的披薩吃者”

“Is this your baby? Can I hold him? (Holds baby and looks both ways) “Just keep your eye on the baby, you can’t do that”.

“這是你的孩子嗎？ 我可以抱住他嗎？ (抱抱嬰兒，雙向看)“只要注意嬰兒，就不能那樣做”。

But one of my favorite Demetri Martin jokes is one of his simplest ones, and goes like this:

但是我最喜歡的Demetri Martin笑話之一是他最簡單的笑話之一，它是這樣的：

Simply brilliant.

簡直太棒了。

What makes it funny is its simplicity and human truth. Accidentally bumping into someone at the supermarket can warrant either a “I’m sorry”, or a “I apologize”. When you forget to send that email to your boss he/she was expecting, you can use “sorry” or “apologize”.

讓它變得有趣的是它的簡單性和人類的真實性。 在超市不小心撞到某人可能會引起“對不起”或“我道歉”。 當您忘記將該電子郵件發送給他/她期望的老板時，可以使用“抱歉”或“道歉”。

But in the context of a funeral-when empathy and words matter, the difference is everything.

但是在葬禮的背景下，當移情和言語很重要時，區別就在于一切。

So what does that mean for UX writers? Writers know that great microcopy is finding the right tone between empathy, context and meaning.

那么，這對UX編寫者意味著什么呢？ 作家知道偉大的顯微鏡正在同情，語境和意義之間找到正確的基調。

UX寫作中的移情 (Practicing Empathy in UX Writing)

On the opposite end of the spectrum of telling a joke, sending out communications to the public, whether it be on a website, email, press release, etc…requires a high level of empathy in order for it to be received the right way.

在講笑話，向公眾發送通訊，在網站，電子郵件，新聞發布等方面，卻恰恰相反，需要較高的同理心才能正確接收。

Example-In response to the novel coronavirus pandemic, the IRS issued a stimulus check to every American meeting certain requirements.

示例-針對新的冠狀病毒大流行，美國國稅局向每個滿足某些要求的美國人發出了刺激檢查。

The problem: However, due to some technical difficulties, not every citizen received their checks on time, and the tool they used to find out more did not return any valuable information.This obviously caused quite a stir amongst confused users, wondering where their check was, and the expected turnaround time for when they could receive it.

問題 ：但是，由于某些技術困難，并不是每個公民都能按時收到支票，他們用來查找更多信息的工具沒有返回任何有價值的信息，這顯然在困惑的用戶中引起了不小的轟動，他們想知道他們的支票在哪里是，以及他們何時可以收到它的預期周轉時間。

For users checking the IRS website, here’s the response they received if their payment was not yet processed:

對于檢查IRS網站的用戶，以下是他們尚未收到付款的回復：

This messaging is vague, doesn’t set any expectations, and lacks empathy for frustrated users depending on this check to pay for their next utility bill.

此消息內容含糊不清，沒有設定任何期望，并且對受挫的用戶缺乏同情心，用戶只能依靠這張支票來支付下一次的水電費。

The only thing of value it offers is pointing them to an FAQ page, but it still feels cold and devoid of empathy.

它提供的唯一有價值的東西是將他們指向FAQ頁面，但是仍然感到冷漠和缺乏同理心。

So how would a UX writer do it better? Here’s how one UX writer on LinkedIn revised it:

那么，UX編寫者將如何做得更好？ 這是LinkedIn上一位UX作家的修改方式：

There’s a much clearer picture of what’s happening with the payment. The simple use of the word “yet” implies that while the information isn’t available at this time, it will be at a later date.

有關付款情況的圖片要清晰得多。 簡單使用“還”一詞意味著雖然目前尚無法獲得該信息，但它會在以后發布。

The rest of the body copy accentuates that point, and provides a specific date to make it crystal clear to users when they can expect to check again.

正文的其余部分強調了這一點，并提供了一個特定的日期，以使用戶在可以期望再次檢查時清晰可見。

It’s a message full of empathy and understanding.

這是充滿同情和理解的信息。

However, in my personal opinion, I think even this message can be further improved in 2 ways:

但是，以我個人的觀點，我認為甚至可以通過以下兩種方式進一步改進此消息：

• Less apologetic: I believe this messaging may be a little TOO apologetic in terms of messaging. Why? Because in cases like this, it’s often not due to a particular fault of anyone(a large batch payment to all Americans may take time)…and I’d imagine the style guide for government properties like this refrains from overusing an apologetic tone if possible.

  不太抱歉 ：我認為此消息傳遞在消息傳遞方面可能有點過分道歉。 為什么？ 因為在這種情況下，這通常不是由于任何人的特殊過錯(向所有美國人大筆付款可能需要時間)……而且我想像這樣的政府財產風格指南會避免過度使用道歉語氣。

• Too wordy: This exceeds the character count and attention span for many people who just want a simple explanation for what’s going on with their payment.

  太羅word：對于許多只想簡單解釋其付款情況的人來說，這超出了字符數和注意力范圍。

Here’s how I would write it:

這是我的寫法：

Solution: Clear, concise, and appropriate for an IRS communication.

解決方案：清晰，簡潔且適合于IRS通信。

Writing for the web and interfaces is a lot like writing a joke, as both disciplines require a deep understanding of human psychology, context, and empathy. Poor communications can result in a backlash of complaints, confusion, and more work for the content creators down the road. A joke that doesn’t speak on a human truth, or needs more information to be explained, typically results in a light chuckle, silence, or worst of all, boredom.

為網絡和界面編寫就像在開玩笑一樣，因為這兩個學科都需要對人類的心理，情境和同理心有深刻的理解。 溝通不暢會導致投訴，混亂和內容創建者的大量工作。 開個玩笑說不出人類的真相，或者需要更多的信息來解釋，通常會導致輕笑，沉默或最糟糕的是無聊。

By implementing the 3 rules of good UX writing: clear, concise, and useful, and balancing the right tone of empathy and tone, we can achieve better user experiences across all industries.

通過實施良好的UX編寫的3條規則：清晰，簡潔和有用，并平衡移情和語氣的正確語調，我們可以在所有行業中獲得更好的用戶體驗。